[NSRCA-discussion] 6S+4S-Good or Bad?

[Peter Vogel]

If you want an easy way to track battery performance over time, check out RCLogBook for the iPhone...  In fact, that gives me an idea for a k-factor article!

Peter+

Sent from my iPhone5

On Dec 10, 2012, at 1:50 PM, Larry Diamond <ldiamond at diamondrc.com> wrote:

> Probably not something I would notice in intermediate. However, if running multiple packs for a 10s setup in higher classes, I might recommend pairing the packs for life and tracking the discharge performance. It would be easier to see when a pack starts to fall off. Perhaps many don't track the discharge/charge data that closely.
> \
> If I decide to run two 5s packs, or a combination of, that is what I will do... I don't fly well at this point, but I can see myself using Pattern Plane packs only for pattern planes and contests... I would have a seperate pool of packs for sport flying...
>  
> Based on Dave's e-mail below, it may not be a concern.
> 
> From: Dave Burtion <burtona at atmc.net>
> To: mike mueller <mikemueller at f3aunlimited.com>; General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 2:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 6S+4S-Good or Bad?
> 
> I have 10S, 8S, and 6S electric pattern style planes. I buy only 5S and 3S packs and can mix and match to fly all of them with the needed combinations. I do buy all the same C ratings and Mah capacity for these packs though. It's been working OK for 2-3 years for me.
> Dave
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: mike mueller
> To: General pattern discussion
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 2:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 6S+4S-Good or Bad?
> 
>  Great point Mark
> 
> From: "Atwood, Mark" <atwoodm at paragon-inc.com>
> To: General pattern discussion <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org> 
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 1:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 6S+4S-Good or Bad?
> 
> I think this would be my biggest concern, that while the packs might be labeled the same (same MAH and C rating) that the interncal cells might actually vary more between 4s and 6s configurations than they would with identical 5s pack. Different production runs, etc.
> 
> Theoretically though there should be no difference.
> 
> 
> Mark Atwood
> Paragon Consulting, Inc.  |  President
> 5885 Landerbrook Drive Suite 130, Cleveland Ohio, 44124
> Phone: 440.684.3101 x102  |  Fax: 440.684.3102
> mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com<mailto:mark.atwood at paragon-inc.com>  |  www.paragon-inc.com<http://www.paragon-inc.com/>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Dec 10, 2012, at 11:54 AM, Bill's Email wrote:
> 
> Yes, just like when using two 5S packs in series you must use the same capacity and "C" rating.
> 
> 
> On 12/10/12 8:39 AM, J N Hiller wrote:
> Same capacity and C rating also???
> Jim
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org> [mailto:nsrca-discussion-bounces at lists.nsrca.org]On Behalf Of atwooddon at aol.com<mailto:atwooddon at aol.com>
> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2012 7:40 AM
> To: nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Subject: Re: [NSRCA-discussion] 6S+4S-Good or Bad?
> 
> Hey Bob
> 
> There should be no difference in performance compared to 2 5S setup. Obviously, charging is different due to unequal cell counts in packs, but to the ESC, it looks like a 10S pack when you connect a 6S and a 4S in series.
> 
> Don
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Pastorello <rpasto513 at gmail.com><mailto:rpasto513 at gmail.com>
> To: PatternList <nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org><mailto:nsrca-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> Sent: Mon, Dec 10, 2012 7:18 am
> Subject: [NSRCA-discussion] 6S+4S-Good or Bad?
> Wondering if anyone has run these instead of 10s, and were results different from 2x 5S setups?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> 
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> 
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org<mailto:NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org>
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com/
> Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2634/5947 - Release Date: 12/09/12
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NSRCA-discussion mailing list
> NSRCA-discussion at lists.nsrca.org
> http://lists.nsrca.org/mailman/listinfo/nsrca-discussion
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nsrca.org/pipermail/nsrca-discussion/attachments/20121210/0b2d176f/attachment.html>